Legal Compliance75/100
The tender correctly identifies the procedure type and CPV codes under The Procurement Act 2023. However, the explicit lack of specific mandatory exclusion grounds and detailed evaluation criteria (weighting, sub-criteria) represents a significant legal transparency issue.
•No specific mandatory exclusion grounds detailed
•Missing detailed evaluation criteria and methodology
Clarity60/100
While the services and multi-stage process are outlined, the tender explicitly lacks specified evaluation criteria, making it unclear how bids will be judged. Furthermore, the description of '2 Lots' combined with a 'sole supplier' requirement for both lots creates significant ambiguity regarding bidding options.
•Missing explicit evaluation criteria and methodology
•Ambiguity regarding bidding on individual lots vs. sole supplier for both
Completeness65/100
Basic information like title, organization, value, and deadlines are present. However, the critical absence of detailed evaluation criteria and comprehensive tender specifications (beyond general notices) indicates significant incompleteness in the core tender documentation.
•Missing detailed evaluation criteria and weighting
•Lack of comprehensive tender specifications beyond general notices
Fairness40/100
Fairness is severely compromised by the explicit lack of evaluation criteria, preventing objective bid preparation. The requirement for a single supplier to provide services for both lots, despite the tender being 'divided into parts', significantly restricts competition and disadvantages specialized SMEs. The absence of e-submission also limits equal access.
•Missing explicit evaluation criteria and transparency
•Restrictive requirement for sole supplier across both lots, limiting SME participation
Practicality60/100
The tender provides key practical dates like contract start and duration. However, the absence of electronic submission is a significant practical drawback, potentially increasing administrative burden for bidders and the contracting authority.
•No electronic submission (e-submission) supported
Data Consistency70/100
Most key fields are populated, and dates are logical. However, there is an internal inconsistency between the tender being 'Divided into Parts' (2 Lots) and the requirement for a 'sole supplier' to provide services for both lots. Some codes are also missing.
•Inconsistency between 'Divided into Parts' and 'sole supplier for both lots' requirement
•Missing procedure and type codes
Sustainability20/100
The tender makes no mention of any green procurement, social aspects, or innovation focus. This represents a missed opportunity to integrate broader public value considerations into the procurement process.
•No green procurement criteria
•No social criteria